RAYMOND RUTHERFORD STALLINGS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no prejudicial or reversible error in the trial proceedings.
[1] A jury's determination of witness credibility, based on evidence presented and witness observation, will not be disturbed on appeal.
[2] A defendant's voluntary statements made to law enforcement after an arrest, even if made before being advised of constitutional rights, may be admissible as evidence.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was convicted of second-degree murder after admitting to shooting the victim but claiming self-defense. Evidence included witness testim…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reversible Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant (defendant below) was charged by indictment with murder in the first degree. A jury of his peers returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The evidence revealed that the victim was shot five times. The defendant admitted the shooting but claimed that he did so in self defense. One of the State’s witnesses testified that he had seen the defendant an hour or an hour and one-half before the shooting at a dice game in the parking lot of a liquor store and that the defendant then had a pistol in his belt. The same witness testified that at the time of the incident culminating in this appeal he saw the defendant fire first at the victim; that the victim fell to the ground and that the witness did not know whether the victim ever fired his gun. The defendant continued shooting, then shot with the victim’s gun and finally pistol-whipped the victim. A policeman testified that about five minutes after he arrived at the scene the appellant “ran into” him and volunteered the statement “I killed him, I had to do it. He shot me first, I wanted the black mother [expletive] dead.” The defendant was placed under arrest but refused to be advised of his constitutional rights, further stating: “I shot him”. “No, he shot me, I pushed him down, I took his gun and I shot him with his gun and then I left.” The defendant, testifying in his own behalf, stated that the victim first shot at him (the defendant) and that he (the defendant) would not have shot the victim had he not felt that he had to protect himself.
The jury heard the evidence and observed the several witnesses. Their determination as to which witness spoke the truth may not be disturbed by us.
We have carefully examined the record and have read the briefs filed on behalf of the parties. Our consideration of the points raised on this appeal does not dem onstrate to us that prejudicial or reversible error was committed during the trial. The judgment and sentence appealed are therefore
Affirmed.
SPECTOR, Acting C. J, and BOYER and McCORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stallings v. State, 319 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)…er denying his motion to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of second degree murder, and sentencing him to life. The sole issue is whether the trial court erred in its denial of the motion. In Stallings v. State, 297 So. 2d 593 (Fla.App. 1st, 1974), this Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment and sentence. Thereafter, under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, Stallings filed a motion to vacate and set aside which the trial court denied without an ev-identia…